Originally Posted by
RAT 5
Whether the GA was pilot induced or ATC induced is a debate.
No, it isn't. We know (from the TSB report) that the aircraft was already climbing when the controller instructed a GA.
The threshold 28R and the beginning of taxi C are side by side; or is there a heavily displaced rwy threshold.
No significantly displaced threshold according to Google Earth or the airport chart.
If AC overflew the taxiway for 400m BEFORE the GA, and at a low height, and if they were on the correct glide path to land the correct distance in, it suggests they flew level for 3-400m.
See above. We don't know at what point the pilot initiated the GA, and we're unlikely to until we see the final report. But we DO know from the TSB that the aircraft had established a positive ROC by the time it overflew UAL863 (the third aircraft in the queue) and maybe even before that. It looks like the heights being quoted have a ±50' resolution, so it may even have been climbing by the time it passed over the second or even the first aircraft (which, scarily, would suggest that it may have been even lower than 100' at that point).
Were they taking full length or an intersection?
See my previous post. Subject to the usual FR24 caveats, all 4 aircraft in the queue had passed the last link (November) that would have permitted an intersection takeoff.